2024 (3) TMI 84 - AT - Customs

Rejection of application seeking amendment of the bill of entries u/s 149 - mis-declaration of the HSN Code due to clerical error - imported consignments of Calcium Phosphate - interest and penalty - HELD THAT - From the fact that soon after detection on 26.11.2020 the appellant paid the differential duty along with interest and penalty on 4.12.2020 without any protest. From the nature of amendment sought by the appellant in Bills of Entry the same is liable to be allowed since only a paper declaration was sought for amending the Customs Tariff Heading from 25 to 28. The observations made by the Delhi High Court in CC Vs. M.D. Overseas 2023 (9) TMI 1271 - DELHI HIGH COURT are relevant in the present context on the applicability of Section 149 of the Act. Thus it would well be considered as a mistake which has been rectified at the first available opportunity and therefore there is no error in allowing the application made by the appellant u/s 149 of the Act seeking amendment of the bill of entries. The amendment sought by the appellant in the facts of the present case is justified and therefore the impugned order is liable to be set aside. The Department is directed to amend the Bill of Entries by exercising power u/s 149 of the Customs Act and pass appropriate orders on the appellant depositing the requisite fee under Notification No. 36/2017-Customs (NT). The appeal is accordingly allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge to rejection of amendment of Bill of Entry under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Summary:

Issue 1: Request for amendment of Bill of Entries under Section 149 of the Customs Act

The appellant, engaged in manufacturing, imported Calcium Phosphate, mis-declared under Chapter 25 instead of Chapter 28, leading to differential duties. The appellant sought amendment of Bill of Entries, citing clerical error and advice from supplier. The authorities rejected the request, stating mis-declaration wasn't revealed suo-moto. The appellant appealed, arguing for amendment based on documentary evidence and past classification practices.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 149 of the Customs Act

The Tribunal considered Section 149, allowing amendment of documents post-clearance based on existing documentary evidence. Citing past judgments, including Dimension Data India Pvt. Ltd case, the Tribunal emphasized the permissibility of amendment even after clearance for home consumption. The Tribunal highlighted the distinction from ITC Ltd. case and upheld the relevance of documentary evidence for amendment requests.

Issue 3: Application of Section 149 in the present case

The Tribunal referred to the Bombay High Court decision, emphasizing the permissibility of amendments post-clearance based on existing evidence. It noted the appellant's timely payment of differential duty, lack of protest, and the nature of the amendment sought. Citing CC Vs. M.D. Overseas case, the Tribunal stressed the legislative intent behind Section 149 and the absence of limitation for seeking amendments.

Decision:

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the Department to amend the Bill of Entries under Section 149 of the Customs Act. It highlighted the rectification of the mistake at the earliest opportunity and the protection of revenue interests through duty payment. The Tribunal emphasized the legislative purpose of providing remedies through amendments and set aside the impugned order, allowing the requested amendment.

*( Pronounced in open Court on 29 / 02 / 2024 )*